D&D General The Owlbear Druid: How Would You Do It? (A Poll)

The Owlbear Druid: How Would You Do It?

  • I wouldn't. It's against the rules, full stop.

    Votes: 6 4.3%
  • I'd change the druid's Wild Shape ability to allow owlbears.

    Votes: 6 4.3%
  • I'd change the druid's Wild Shape ability to allow all Beasts.

    Votes: 4 2.9%
  • I'd change the druid's Circle of the Moon subclass to allow owlbears.

    Votes: 14 10.1%
  • I'd change the druid's Circle of the Moon subclass to allow all Beasts.

    Votes: 9 6.5%
  • I'd create a whole new druid circle just for owlbears (Circle of the Owlbear)

    Votes: 6 4.3%
  • I'd create a whole new druid circle for all Monstrosities (Circle of Monsters)

    Votes: 21 15.1%
  • I'd change the owlbear's creature type to Beast.

    Votes: 50 36.0%
  • I'd do something else (see my comment)

    Votes: 23 16.5%

ECMO3

Hero
There is no particular reason for the owlbear to be a monstrosity rather than a beast any more than there is for the platypus.
According to the Monster Manual Owlbears are a result of magic experiments gone awry. That would be a reason not to be beasts and different from a Platypus which is a natural animal.

Not saying you have to use that fiction in your home campaign, but in terms of the official rules they are not normal animals.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mad_Jack

Legend
There is no particular reason for the owlbear to be a monstrosity rather than a beast any more than there is for the platypus. In my world they're beasts, (and also the totem animal of our barbarian)

Your barbarian has a platypus totem animal? That's awesome... :p

On topic, I have no problem with either just rewriting several monster statblocks to make them beasts instead of monstrosities, expanding the moon druid's list of available creatures to include some monstrosities at higher levels, or just using the feat that @CleverNickName posted.
 

Remove ads

Top